Friday, August 22, 2008

The Mangum Opus

And Bill Thomas appropriately notes: "Any book written by Ms. Mangum should be displayed in the fiction section. I think it's very sad she's trying to capitalize off the false and malicious allegations she made against members of the Duke lacrosse team."]

The Mangum Opus, once scheduled for release in June, is now due out in October—at least according to this press release, which is riddled with grammatical and other errors:

Poignant Memoir Reveals Details of a Difficult Life

(Los Angeles) - The Duke Lacrosse case is no longer the lead story on the network and cable news shows, but there is one central figure, who was there on the night in question and who’s [sic] voice has been silent. She’s been called an exotic dancer and a prostitute, and the public was led to believe she wanted to frame some “good college students” [sic: no such quote was ever cited] from Duke and put them in jail. Although most of the questions appear to be answered in the Duke Lacrosse Case, one still remains. Who is Crystal Gail Mangum? During the investigation and in its aftermath, she never spoke publicly [sic: she gave an interview to the N&O, in which she gave a falsified version of the party], that is until now.

The Last Dance for [Nancy?] Grace: The Crystal Mangum Story is the only definitive account of the life and struggles of the woman at the center of the Duke Lacrosse case, the alleged accuser [sic? Is anyone denying that Mangum was the accuser?]. Were it not for the Duke Lacrosse Case, she likely would be described as a bright [sic], young woman from Durham, North Carolina, who has had a difficult life. Like so many of us, Crystal has made mistakes and has struggled to make amends. Her biggest mistake just happened to lead to one of the most controversial legal cases in American history.

Published reports throughout 2006 and 2007 portrayed Crystal as a gold-digging hooker searching for a big payday or as a [sic] unstable, troubled young woman.

The truth about Crystal’s life, her account of what happened on March 13, 2006, accusations[??], and the motives of the people criticizing her were never seriously explored [sic!! We heard of little else for the early months of the case.]. As people appeared from out of the woodwork to offer their opinions about Crystal, no one ever asked the one person who could set the record straight [sic: Mangum was repeatedly asked—for instance, by both 60 Minutes and ABC News—and, of course, presented her “levitation” story to the Attorney General.]

To complicate matters, the State of North Carolina was in the throws [sic] of a monumental legal battle. Criminal defense attorneys argued over how much evidence should be turned over by district attorneys in all criminal cases [there was no argument here: it was the law of the state], not just the Duke Lacrosse Scandal; a principal [sic] called “Open File Discovery”. The result was a very complicated legal theory [there’s nothing too complicated about a law that said the prosecutor had to turn over everything to the defense] that collided with Crystal Mangum’s desire to have the case heard in open court [!!!].

The Last Dance for [Nancy?] Grace can’t and doesn’t deal with the complex legal aspects of the case. Disbarred Durham County, North Carolina district attorney Michael Nifong was removed due to misconduct in the case. Nifong’s misunderstanding or some will say willful disregard for open file discovery was the reason the case fell apart. The muddling of facts about Crystal’s life, along with North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper’s desire to settle the dispute over open file discovery [what? When did Cooper give an impression that he wanted “to settle the dispute over open file discovery”?], swallowed the case whole.

The Last Dance for [Nancy?] Grace deals openly and honestly with Crystal Mangum’s life. It shows the portrait of a real person and not some caricature. Crystal’s story is at times heartbreaking. She has endured a series of very difficult periods in her life, but each time she has emerged stronger, striving to do better.

This book is an important tool to discuss race, class, sex and the judicial process [I bet.]. It also provides very important lessons for any young person trying to make good life-choices [!!!].

Crystal Magnum is donating one dollar from the purchase of each book to help battered women.

All sorts of comments rush to mind - many not suitable for print. It is not surprising that Mangum and her supporters desire to "set the record straight" so as to continue the meta narrative that she was just a poor, disadvantaged, but good firl at heart who was wrongly victimized by a group of privileged white men. That will be her story and that of her possee until the end of time. And that is why the civil suits need to go forward. Harm was done to the three men (and by extention Pressler and the rest of the team) and continues to be done - the fact that the documentary will be out there for all to see drudging up their names and pictures is, in and of itself, harmful. If she wanted to do any good at all the proceeds from the movie should go towards defraing the legal costs of the three men.cks

By not presecuting her we are allowing her to continue with an unrestrained chorus of lies. Sadly, her lies will now create a profit in book sales. Not prosecuting CGM was a huge mistake. We need to learn from this and start not only prosecuting false accusers but insuring that the penalty for the devastating lies of false accusations (that now go unpunished) are raised to a level that reflects the damages they cause.

What a convenient time for her to speak out. The case has been forgotten by most of the public and all of the media except KC. There's plenty of other pressing news this fall to keep the focus away from Crystal and the unfocused, incoherent, and misspelled lies that are sure to abound in this book.

It won't get the critical attention it deserves, unfortunately, but if we're lucky it won't get any positive attention at all.

Crystal Gale Mangum needs to be charged and convicted in this case to prevent her from profiting from the crime she has committed.Or maybe, the lacross boys will now sue her in civil court, with ALL the proceeds going to battered women's charities.

She won't remember exactly happened at 610 N. Buchanan Boulevard on the night of March 13, 2006-- she wasn't feeling well when she got there and those boys offered her something to drink, it's all just a blur and blackouts, she's not even sure what she said about it after at the hospital, but later that Mr. Nifong seemed to know, and the DPD-- but it was a terrible night and something happened. That she'll never forget. But she carries on, trying to make a better life for herself and her children.

The stupidity of people. They get a pass because of their race and dont get prosecuted or sued because people know they cant get anything or those in power who need minority or Democratic support arent about to speak out and put her in jail. Instead of fading away she writes a book. Now she will be sued and made to look worse then she does.

Who is advising this whore? The NAACP? The stupidest organization in the world.

8/22/08 12:41 PM********************************I have to agree. I read she is looking into Law or grad school. Law school is out with her criminal record. I'm guessing that she hasn't got enough left to study for the bar. NCCU might give her a grad slot, but she'll never be accepted to the bar

Like so many of us, Crystal has made mistakes and has struggled to make amends.

Has she now? In what ways, specifically, has she struggled to make amends to the young men whose lives she disrupted?

She has endured a series of very difficult periods in her life, but each time she has emerged stronger, striving to do better.Really? In what way was the woman who made false rape accusations a stronger or better person than prior incarnations?

If the book sellers at Barnes and Noble and Borders can keep Until Proven Innocent hidden from MY view they have the ability to place Mangum Opus up on the table near the front door!

I can imagine a huge sign near the stacks of books with a bright sparkler from the Sex Workers Art Show drawing attention towards and encouraging customers to learn about the coming Class.Gender.Race wars in the good 'ole USA.

Hopefully all of us will take a magic marker to those signs and write OFM or Only Facts Matter!::GP

From looking at this preview, it's a fairly safe bet that the actual book, if it appears, will libel multiple parties. I doubt she gets much out of it in the end financially and it doesn't look like it is going to improve her public image a whole heck of a lot.

Hopefully it does come out to provide us some entertainment, sort of liking watching cars slide down an ice covered street into slow motion wrecks.

You've all missed the underlying motivation for the book. Duke told her that she needs a "publication" so that they can give her a joint appointment, with tenure, in "African and African American Studies" and in "Women's Studies." After two years, she'll be made dean of the social sciences.

Crystal’s story is at times heartbreaking. She has endured a series of very difficult periods in her life, but each time she has emerged stronger, striving to do better.

Really? Her first false three person gang rape allegation was followed by a second. Her first child out of wedlock was followed by a second and a third. Problems with drugs were ongoing the last time she was in the public eye. When were the periods that weren't difficult?

First, criminals should not profit financially from their crimes. Crystal at least filed a false police report in reporting a rape that never happened. However, she was also guilty of other crimes ranging from perjury to obstruction of justice. That she should make money because of her false accusations is intolerable. Just as Mike Nifong was sued to ensure that he could not keep profits from a much-discussed book, so should Mangum be sued.

Second, the chances that a book by Mangum would be truthful are nil. The main reason AG Cooper gave in his press conference when he was asked about not prosecuting Crystal was that Crystal still believed a rape had occurred, even though there was no credible evidence for that belief. We know that Crystal has had a long record of mental illness and has been on a variety of anti-psychotic medications. Her actions before, during and after the March 13, 2006 party suggest that Mangum was not and is not always in touch with reality. The only consistency in her stories about what happened was their lack of consistency. Why should anyone expect anything different now?

Third, her book will lend credence to the "something happened" crowd. Despite a three-month exhaustive investigation and a clear declaration of innocence by the North Carolina Attprney General, there are still many people in Durham and elsewhere who believe that Mangum was assaulted in some way during the March 13 party. We do not know what the book will say, but Crystal's explanations of what she was doing that night and why will play into the hands of those who, no matter what the evidence, want to believe the false meta-narrative that priveleged white athletes attacked a poor defenseless black woman.

Finally, the book will glorify the victimhood of Crystal in particular and black people in general, blaming racism for her ills and criminal activity. Mangum may have had a difficult early life, but so do a lot of individuals who do not turn to drug abuse and prostitution. I expect her to blame racism for her situation, including a swipe at Nifong for ensnaring her into the case and all of her public critics for not understanding her mental problems and her struggle to raise her children. Of course she will gloss over the facts that she lied in bringing the charges and she compounded the lies by not dropping the charges as her stories were proved false.

Mangum takes great risks in publishing her story because she does face the possibility of lawsuits which could result in the unsealing of her medical records. Months ago there was speculation that Mangum might sue the lacrosse players for alleged injuries suffered on March 13 (falling down the stairs, etc.). At the time, a highly reliable source told me that Mangum would be making a major mistake if she were a party to a lawsuit in which her medical records were unsealed.

It is also known that Private Investigators for the Lacrosse families had uncovered a great deal of dirt about her activities prior to the March 13 party.

We can hope that this book will not do damage to the lacrosse players and their families, but even the fact of its publication will open up old wounds. It is being published by a minor publisher so it may not have much distribution and hence few sales.

It's really a shame that you can't just throw idiots like these in jail.

Tribulation will begin anew.

The families of the lacrosse players will be forced to do battle with Mangum and (as always, by extension), the black community, over issues that have been proven without a doubt long ago.

As Joe Cheshire said, this woman is the cause of so much trouble and has set back attitudes among many people.....needlessly.

Long ago Cheshire said that Mangum "has a meanness about her"......and he was right.

In future cases, other women will suffer because of this vile human being; however, I blame those around her---especially those in Durham who certainly know better---for enabling and facilitating this nightmare.

"Something happened", alright.

Roy Cooper made a mistake by not charging her for her crimes.

Mangum's book will be publisher's first

By Mark Donovan : The Herald-Sun

Aug 23, 2008

DURHAM -- "The Last Dance for Grace: The Crystal Mangum Story," will be the first book published by fire! Books, a subsidiary of Los Angeles-based Denisoff Consulting.

Co-author Vincent "Ed" Clark, a Lillington resident, is a partner in Denisoff Consulting with Michael Denisoff of Los Angeles and Courtney Greene of Des Moines, Iowa.

The company, Clark said, is working on a second book, by Angel Heredia, a former Mexican discus thrower who testified in court on May 21 that he had supplied former Olympic gold medal sprinter Marion Jones of Chapel Hill with performance-enhancing drugs at the request of her coach, Trevor Graham. Jones is serving a six-month prison term for perjury in the case and has been stripped of her Olympic medals stripped retroactive to the 2000 Games.

Clark may be familiar to area residents because of what he said was his 15-plus-year run of Sunday morning commentaries on FM radio station Foxy 107.1/104.3 and one-time participation in a political affairs program on N.C. Central University's FM station, WNCU 90.7, as "Ed Clark," and as a former newspaper columnist with The Chapel Hill News.

He said Mangum signed an exclusive agreement to be represented by Denisoff Consulting more than a year ago. He said Mangum first contacted him about two years ago after hearing him on the radio and that he's been representing her ever since.

Mangum could not be reached for comment. Clark refused to say where she is living, other than that she is still in the Durham "area."

Clark said Mangum's public silence in the two years since the lacrosse case first created a media firestorm has been scripted.

"By design she hasn't said anything in two years," Clark said. "This book is not trying to impugn anyone, not trying to assign any blame. Crystal talks about the lead-up to the night of the lacrosse party. ... She says she could have made better decisions."

Clark said Mangum insists in the book that "her story's never changed. Never did."

A news release about the book says: "The truth about Crystal's life, her account of what happened on March 13, 2006, accusations, and the motives of the people criticizing her were never seriously explored. As people appeared from out of the woodwork to offer their opinions about Crystal, no one ever asked the one person who could set the record straight."

My nightmare is that Mangum may be libel-proof. Her first defense will be that the Duke students are "public figures" and so comments about them are not subject to the ordinary law of libel. (Of course they are public figures only because she made them such by her false accusations, but who expects the law to make sense.)

Her second defense will be that her comments were made without malice or reckless disregard for the truth because she is demonstrably mentally impaired. The latter fact will be easy enough to establish.

I hope some lawyer will tell me that my nightmare is just that and not a possibility in the real world of the sane and awake.

Tom Campbell, co-owner of The Regulator Bookstore on Ninth Street near Duke's East Campus, said he wouldn't hesitate to carry the book.

"I can't imagine we wouldn't," Campbell said. "Having a book doesn't mean we support everything in the book."

Bruce Bridges, owner of the Know Bookstore on Fayetteville Street, said he would sell the book because it's important to have both sides of the lacrosse story on the record.

"I'm one of those people who think the whole story didn't come out," Bridges said.

So far, the lacrosse case has produced two books. "Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case" was written by K.C. Johnson, a New York City-based history professor and author of the Durham-In-Wonderland Web log, and Stuart Taylor Jr., a National Journal reporter.

HBO has bought the rights to Johnson's and Taylor's book and is planning to make a movie based on it.

The second book, "It's Not About the Truth: The Untold Story of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case and the Lives It Shattered," was written by former Duke lacrosse coach Mike Pressler.

Courtney Greene of Des Moines, Iowa is the recently appointed Bureau Chief for the Public Information Bureau of the Iowa Department of Public Safety (Highway Patrol). She was formerly on special assignment in the "Rebuild Iowa Office" and prior to that had been Press Secretary to Iowa's recently elected Governor, Chet Culver, a Democrat, a position she began after Culver's term began in January 2007.

However, the Denisoff Consulting Firm's website here does not list Courtney Greene as a partner.

If you look at the credentials of the partners of Denison Consulting, some have college and graduate education.

In Vincent E. Clark's biography, the only college experience listed is, "Vincent ran track for the University of North Carolina." That might help explain why the "... press release, ... is riddled with grammatical and other errors ..."

That said, the link KC provided to the video interview of Joe Cheshire is excellent. Cheshire covers all of the bases and, although he clearly states that he does not represent the families in civil matters, he explains what his advice to them would be.

Debrah, your posts are always exceptional but this put into words for me...exactly what I was feeling myself. Thank you.

Many have paid and will pay for Crystal's laziness and selfishness. Her "privileged" mindset that she is entitled to get the things she wants... the easiest and sleaziest way.

This woman had two parents providing her with free childcare and a free place to live. She had student loans. She had MANY choices and advantages other single Moms do not. She chose a fast buck lifestyle.

"You've all missed the underlying motivation for the book. Duke told her that she needs a "publication" so that they can give her a joint appointment, with tenure, in "African and African American Studies" and in "Women's Studies." After two years, she'll be made dean of the social sciences."

..and then, of course, there is always the potential for elevation to a professorial appointment in the law school...

Re: Debra's comment that, "The families of the lacrosse players will be forced to do battle with Mangum and (as always, by extension), the black community, over issues that have been proven without a doubt long ago."

I respectfully disagree with Debra on this one.

While the families may choose to do battle, I hope they won't feel they have to. Must the players and the families hire lawyers and make a huge case everytime Mangum says something? That's giving her way too much power.

Maybe Mangum's book will be apologetic and healing. But even if it's not, I think it would be perfectly okay if the players simply chose to rely on the fact that the highest law enforcement officer in North Carolina has declared them innocent of doing anything to Mangum, and leave it at that.

In another thread, (I believe) Bill Anderson referred to Nifong as a 'sociopath.' I thought well, yes, of course, not all sociopaths/psychopaths are murderers, they just play them on TV.

But the concept of people who have no conscience, no empathy, no guilt, no shame, no remorse ('oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause') is so alien to decent people it's hard to accept. These are sick people and as far as I know there is nothing anyone can do to help or change them.

Nifong, Mangum, (so many others we have come to know in this case) we can feel sorry for them but we can never understand. To expect them to ever do the right thing is simply foolish. As far as they are concerned, they have done nothing wrong! They don't care about other people and they simply believe they have a right to do whatever they want. They will continue to use and hurt anyone and everyone until they are stopped.

The events of today bear an almost eerie similarity to some of the issues we have discussed in the Duke lacrosse hoax namely, presumption of guilt by leaders and the media, shoddy academic credentials, and lack of accountability and apology for wrongs committed.

In 2006, a group of US Marines was alleged to have committed “atrocities” in combat operations in Haditha, Iraq on November 19, 2005. These men were subject to the Military’s Universal Code of Military Justice, a far more strict system of law than the US criminal law applicable to the lacrosse players. The Marines were immediately brought to trial for the alleged crimes; several refused to plead guilty to lesser charges, and of the eight charged, seven were completely exonerated. One case remains pending and will likely be dismissed. Like the lacrosse case, the Marines were subjected to worldwide criticism, massive media and citizen presumption of guilt, they and their families suffered tremendously, and their careers were ruined. Unlike the lacrosse players, their families did not have the resources to pursue civil suits.

In the Haditha case, the accepted meta narrative of the far left politically correct crowd abetted by The New York Times, Time Magazine, MSNBC and countless other mainstream media sources, immediately presumed the guilt of the Marines.

Their guilt was also presumed by US Representative John Murtha, himself a former Marine, who, in the style of former lacrosse player and coach Peter Wood, said of the Marines, “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood.”

A United States Senator joined in the presumption of guilt of the Marines and an alleged cover-up of the “atrocities,” and in almost the precise language of the Duke Protesters’ signs of “Please Come Forward” and “Time to Confess,” commented on the Haditha case on Meet The Press, saying, “The system of accountability is, it used to be a gentlemanly thing, as they say, when you make serious mistakes, you step forward and you acknowledge them and you walk away.” (My emphasis)

And like the suspect scholarship and credentials of members of the guilt-presuming Group of 88, this same US Senator had dodged charges of plagiarism after he copied a law review article for a paper he wrote in his first year at law school, and later admitted. “borrowing a British Politician’s campaign speech.” The New York Times also charged this Senator with having “exaggerated his academic credentials.”

And, also like the Group of 88, this Senator has never apologized for his actions and, rather than suffering consequences, he has now, like the Group of 88, been recognized and “promoted.”

That Senator is Joe Biden, the Vice Presidential choice of Barack Obama.

I think it is important that we understand that Crystal is writing a MENOIR and not a scholarly work or autobiography.

Memoir - a narrative composed from a personal experience that focuses on the significance of the relationship between the writer and another individual (or thing) and is supported by memories of specific experiences.Reference:http://www.iclasses.org/assets/literature/literary_glossary.cfm

The attorneys for the Duke men's lacrosse team need to move now to be certain that the PUBLISHER makes a statement in the front of her 'book' cautioning the reader that 'memory' is frequently compromised by events, actions and long term use of drugs...to name just a few.

I still think that there is a "meta-narrative" here that is captivating. KC leaves out the end of the press release:----------------------------Editors Note: ALL inquiries concerning Ms. Mangum are being handled via fire! Books or Denisoff Consulting. Several indivduals have purported to represent Ms. Mangum. At no time in the past or presently has she been represented by anyone other than fire! Books or Denisoff Consulting. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO CONTACT MS. MANGUM DIRECTLY OR DISCUSS THIS MATTER WITH ANYONE OTHER THAN: Vincent Clark, Courtney Greene or Michael Denisoff! ------------------------------CGM's disappearance from view and astonishing absence of attempts to capitalize on her fame can only (in my mind) be explained by someone(s) selling her the notion that she will indeed be richly rewarded but only if it is handled in a careful, rigidly controlled manner. The caveat at the end of the press release virtually confirms that suspicion.

It is ironic that CGM will likely finally get to know the feeling of having been raped- but it will be at the hands of the brothas she entrusted her legacy to.

IIRC, you mentioned in the past that you are a Durham resident and have lived there for quite some time.

That said, I find it peculiar that you would leave anything to chance in this case.

And it certainly would be leaving lots to chance by assuming that what goes on in a place like Durham is ever close to logical and is ever close to reality.

As I've said before, there are many things interesting about Durham. It's an eclectic place with some good restaurants and a rich history. It could be a much better place if only it wasn't run by one half of the population which happens to think that once you're born the Social Services office is to be used like a candy store. Demand what you want and you get it.

I used to go over there for dinner and jazz and know many who live there; however, what is represented to the world is the disturbing aspect of the town.

Finally, the lacrosse families do have to be concerned. Roy Cooper's words mean nothing to the people who have enabled this Hoax.

I sense a whole new démarche of lies beginning anew.

News reports cite comments from residents who think the truth has yet to be told. They are throwing out the idea that the "true story" has been kept from the public.

There will be a huge effort to taint the lacrosse players all over again.

If the decision were mine, I would call David Rudolf and instruct him to do whatever is necessary to destroy this woman and those around her.

I watched the movie "The Lives of Others", written and directed by Florian Henckel Von Donnersmarck, yesterday. The parallels between the GDR Stasi/communist regimes and those involved with the Duke hoax are striking.

For example,

1. The use of a falsehood(s) to reach an ends. It will never be about the truth.

2. The need for otherwise good men/women to be indifferent to the evil around them. Most interesting is how difficult it may be for good men to risk everything when they are in an environment like the communist run GDR and/or Durham/Duke facutly/admin.

3. The power of the state to ignore privacy and individual rights. Of course this was probably most demonstrable in how Duke supported the DPD in allowing access to the players rooms, emails, etc.

4. The power of the state (Duke Admin in this case)to make/break and artist/athlete. Excercising the power to take away ones passion for false ends is evil.

There are many other similarities which suggests that at a minimum those who were directly involved and abetted the hoax certainly modeled their behaviour after communist regimes.

"The Lives of Others" is one of the best movies I've ever seen. It is excellent. One should be sure to watch the interview with the director.

Watching it through the prism of the Duke hoax is very sobering. It will especially hit a nerve for those who went through the interogations with the DPD and were subjected to their homes/rooms being raided.

This post makes valid points and serves as an example of the old adage:

"Success occurs when preparation meets opportunity."

All the N&O's previous work paid off and served them well on a subsequent and significant story.

However, I know that many of us take "kellyke's" point to heart as well.

Since the N&O has gleaned so much information and knowledge about the state's mental health care system......and since under former editor Melanie Sill the lacrosse story was libelously botched in the Spring of 2006.....setting the stage and enabling the Hoax that was to come.....

.....an exposé on the still-looking-for-an-easy-buck dancer and prostitute Crystal Mangum is in order as we now know that she is telling yet another one of her countless stories in a book.

As attorney Joe Cheshire opined, this destructive woman was given a gift of kindness by the lacrosse families when they chose not to go after her legally.

She surely would have been criminally prosecuted.

No act of pity and kindness ever goes unpunished.

It is the height of mental disorder.....not to mention a glimpse of the level of parasitic steel balls that exist among many in Durham, for this woman and her semi-literate enablers to attempt to put forth another insane fairy tale for profit.

If anyone chooses to do a "report" on this woman again, please keep Samiha Khanna as far away from a computer keyboard as possible.

The public will not abide another politically correct and deliberately phony set of facts regarding this story.

If the players were to sue Mangum for libel they would be giving her and her supporters what they have wanted all along: the opportunity for a totally unpredictable jury to "decide" her claims. Talk about leaving things to chance...

"I had wondered what The Times’s position would be when the Justice Department exonerated Steven J. Hatfill, given the hounding that he had received following the anthrax mailings.

Now that the F.B.I. has built a case against Bruce E. Ivins, a military researcher, it is clear that the harm done to Dr. Hatfill was incalculable.

I see a connection to the hoax surrounding the Duke lacrosse players that played itself out in the news media for much of 2006 and 2007. The media frenzy (in which The Times participated) played an important role in what happened, and three young men were indicted for a crime that never occurred.

In that case, reporters barely questioned the statements and reports of the district attorney, the Durham Police Department and Duke University’s president. There was hardly a critical word.

Doesn’t The Times owe the three young men an apology for its coverage?

Now how did a journalist manage to pull-off a VIDEO interview with Joe Cheshire in his Grapes of Wrath seersucker suit about a book that he has not yet read and admittedly knows nothing about?

For 12+ Minutes, no less.

And he talks straight into the camera about having private medical records which is ...the flashing red call to arms for every privacy group within the African and African America Black Community and lest we forget, every Women's Center in this country.

Certain selected segments of that interview will be required viewing in every classroom for extremists-in-training within the academies across this country.

When we finally get this case properly buried someday, I fear it will be in a graveyard with lights.::Hello darkness, my old friend,Ive come to talk with you again,Because a vision softly creeping,Left its seeds while I was sleeping,And the vision that was planted in my brainStill remainsWithin the sound of silence.::GP

I was surprised that my letter to The Times was published. I do not expect that RCD or their families will ever see an apology from The Times or any of the other myriad news outlets that felt so free to rape and pillage their good names. However, it is important (especially given that Crystal Mangum is now going to publish her story) that those of us who have written about the injustices that occurred continue to do so until real justice is done and Nifong, et al be forced to pay damages and, even more important, there are real substantive changes that occur in the North Carolina grand jury system, the DPD, the Durham prosecutor's office, DUMC and last but not least the Duke University adademic and administrative communities. - cks

I am confused and since you are, among other things, a book author perhaps you would be willing to clear something up for me.

Apropos Gary Packwood’s observation about Joe Cheshire’s giving an interview concerning a “book that he has not yet read and admittedly knows nothing about”- could you please help me with defining the term: book.

When rigorously supporting information in a written report, the standard formula for citing data that was obtained from a “book” includes the book’s author, name of the book (underlined), city of publication, name of publisher, year published and the page number(s) the information can be found on.

This also implies that there must also be an accepted definition of the term “publisher”.

CGM’s “forthcoming” tome highlights my ignorance of these terms.

The Herald Sun article you referenced concerning the “press release” announcing the publication of CGM’s “memoirs” contains the following tantalizing statement:--------------------The book will be published by fire! Books, which Clark said he owns with two partners. He said efforts to shop the book to large publishing houses were unproductive.

"They didn't turn it down," Clark said. "A lot of the offers didn't make sense."-------------------To me, that statement implies that fire! Books is a “small” publishing house.I cannot find ANY internet evidence of the existence of a publishing house by the name of fire! Books. If they have ever published any other books I can’t find them. If this is their first book, can they be called a publishing house?

I hate to seem like a pedantic jerk, but either we can agree on the definition of terms or we can’t. I think my questions really are:

1. Do you think that there now exists a completed, copywrited document that will be released in some commercial form in October 2008?2. Could the press release be referring to a work that is still surreptitiously “in progress” for which the instigating parties are looking for signals of how to best proceed and what content to include by ‘testing the waters’ with this (preliminary) announcement?3. Do press releases announcing book publications typically have a completed “book” to point to? 4. Do you find the injunction included in the press release by the triumvirate of parties putatively representing CGM that we (the public) desist from contacting her directly a little bizarre? Wouldn’t it be up to her to refer us to them if she chose not to deal with any of us directly? Their verbiage implies a contractual arrangement between them that we are somehow bound by.

As a footnote, “fire!” is the name of Vincent (Ed) Clark’s blog. His first blog’s name was “shouting fire in a theater.” It pleases me to assume that the implication is that shouting fire in a theater is something Mr. Clark believes oppressed minorities sometimes have a right to do if they are to get their meta narratives across efficiently. fire! Indeed.

I'm a bit confused about your point in your 7:16 comment. I got lost somewhere in the midst of the graveyard metaphor, Simon and Garfunkle's "Sounds of Silence" and "Joe Cheshire (God Love Him)".

And, in the interest of full disclosure, allow me to say that in the summer, I wear a seersucker suit just like Mr. Cheshire's. It’s been a long time since I read "Grapes of Wrath" but I don't quite get the connection. I never saw the movie; perhaps that's the problem.

I think Mr. Cheshire agreed to this interview in hopes of warning Crystal Mangum and her "handlers" who are writing the book.

All he is responding to is the press release, which is what KC posted. Cheshire is not doing a book review. He basically says that if the book is some sort of cathartic admission of the known truth in this case, that's fine, but if the book is going to be yet another Crystal Mangum version of the "truth," in short, more lies, then she will probably become a defendant in a lawsuit.

Remember, there was (and still is) a great deal of controversy and bitterness among some observers (including some who have commented on this Blog) about Mangum not being criminally prosecuted for her false accusations. I think it is pretty clear that Cheshire had been in a discussion with some of the families about either criminal or civil charges being preferred against Mangum. Indeed, either the County or the Attorney General had the option to bring criminal charges, and the families had the option of including her in the civil suits, and they retain the option to add her to the existing suits or bring a new suit against her.

I think Cheshire also made it clear that, while Mangum’s medical records were sealed by the court from the public, they were reviewed by prosecuting and defense attorneys connected with the case, and by the Attorney General staff. I think he also believes that the persons promoting the book have no idea what those records are, and that they are doing Mangum a terrible disservice if they create a new version of the truth (Read: Lies) that will cause the families to pursue a lawsuit that will, by necessity, delve into all of those records.

What the families did in not pursuing a lawsuit against Mangum was a most humane thing to do, particularly considering how much they all suffered.

What Cheshire is doing by granting this interview to warn the authors and Mangum is likewise a most humane thing to do.

I, for one, hope they heed his warning. And if it takes a not-too-veiled-threat of making her records public to make them heed his warning, so be it.

Graduates of elite universities who are 'old school' use 'shunning' and 'shame' to show their 'wrath' towards those who they believe, are behaving badly...and 'they' are usually older white men in seersucker suits (and their wives) who are speaking while seated in one of those charming high back arm chairs.

The 'elites' are seen as pretending to set the social norm for the rest of us mere mortals.

The 'studies' professors (e.g. Women's and AABlack studies) profess (teach/advocate) that it is this 'shunning' and 'shame' from the 'elites' that is the root source for all social inequality.

In my view it will take someone like Joan Foster to come forward and help the elite university graduates to understand that statement of 'shunning' and 'shame' in the 21st Century are not helpful and such statements actually cause the hash light of suspicion to shine on all the graves of past sins that involve those 'little people' who don't live up to the expectations of the elites.

The 'something happened' crowd take NOURISHMENT from all the statement of 'shunning' and the 'shamming'.

Those who routinely use statements of 'shunning' and 'shaming' with respect to the Duke Men's lacrosse rape hoax should at least give some thought to embracing the concept of the SOUND OF SILENCE.

Maybe The Times' public editor, by occasionally publishing letters like yours, is hoping to push for an overall apology from the paper. That's the positive interpretation. A more cynical interpretation is that by printing lettters such as yours, The Times can always say that thay have been open to and even printed negative criticsm of their actions.

In any case, I agree that we should be pushing for judicial reforms, official accountability etc. However, unlike some other posters, I remain convinced that attacking CGM is a losing proposition. She is simulataneously at the center of this case and yet completely peripheral. When Rae Evans said on 60 Minutes that she believed that CGM was Nifong's victim, too, I thought Ms. Evans was just being nice. Now I agree with her. The players were not indicted because of Mangum -- they were indicted despite her. Whether she was a bad actor or not, she was used as a pawn, just as the players were, to advance the interests of other people and institutions, and I think making reforms to discourage that from happening is where the hope for useful action lies.

I have said it from the outset of the case, CGM needed to be sued (and should have been prosecuted) because a book was inevitable, no reasonable person would not see this coming.

Joe Cheshire put she and the publishers on notice. I only wish the AG would have pursued charges against her.

This is what happens when you give a lying career criminal a get out of jail free card, now she wants to profit from her lies by continuing to fuel race divisions (well, I agree I maybe assuming that, but the press release hints at it).

I appreciate this blog very much, but having said that, the Duke administrator who said words to the effect that it wasn't about the truth anymore was correct. The horror of Mangum has been made manifest to a greater power by the indecent behavior of people who should have known better . . . people who could have and should have shown some restraint and common sense. Watch and listen to Joe Chesire. He is right, but I won't just blame Mangum. The fools at Duke University have made a bad thing so much worse than it needed to be. They were even more dishonest than Mangum if that is possible. The terror that they would unleash on the world for their own satisfaction would be worthy of the French Revolution.

No, it has never been about the truth, and that is what I find annoying in the arguments applied in this blog. You can say that this happened or that happened. You would be right, but being right in this case never mattered to the Duke Administration, Duke academics, the NAACP, the City of Durham, Nifong, the mainstream media, and numerous other groups and peoples. The circumstance of the case is deconstructed and blamed and applied regardless of the truth. There is no apology.

You can say to many of these academics, "Did your father or mother or your parents or the society or the country in which you live expect you to be so dishonest?" I think not . . . of course, something must have happened . . . but how much less could have happened and still put people at risk of their freedom of going to prison for years . . . and how little could have occurred before the nothingness that did happend and the truth of that nothingness protect innicent people in their innocence. This wasn't the Bush administration that is anathma to these supposedly educated people. This was Duke! The whole affair is just a disgusting shame.

"The 'something happened' crowd take NOURISHMENT from all the statement of 'shunning' and the 'shamming'."

I appreciate your clarification, but I did not view Cheshire's choice of clothing, or his statements as constituting ""elitist shunning and shaming."

Rather, he has provided sage advice to both Mangum and her co-author Clark ... advise which they would both be wise to heed. If you look at Cheshire's record, you would note that his sage advice and his skills have helped many "mere mortals" who were indigent criminal defendants in the past.

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review